Member states of the UN general assembly - some of whom are prepared to prosecute and jail a woman who seeks an abortion - have been told in blunt terms by their own special rapporteur for health that they are infringing woman's human rights.

Arnand Grover says in a hard-hitting but carefully argued report that all states should provide safe and legal abortion services for woman - as well as contraception. It will not make comfortable reading for the states, where 25% of the world's population live, that turn a woman who desperately wants to end her pregnancy into a criminal, allowing abortion only in cases of rape, incest or where her life is at risk.

Criminal prohibition of abortion is a very clear expression of State interference with a woman's sexual and reproductive health because it restricts a woman's control over her body, possibly subjecting her to unnecessary health risks. Criminal prohibition also requires women to continue unplanned pregnancies and give birth when it is not their choice to do so.

States must take measures to ensure that legal and safe abortion services are available, accessible, and of good quality.

Absolute prohibition under criminal law deprives women of access to what, in some cases, is a life-saving procedure. Even where a clandestine abortion can be performed in a relatively safe, hygienic setting, it may be financially inaccessible for the most vulnerable women. Poor and marginalized women may instead turn to unsafe, self-induced abortions.

Grover will no doubt come under personal attack from some of those who are fundamentally opposed to abortion on ideological grounds, but what makes this an interesting report - and a powerful argument - is that it is based on a cool analysis of the impact of restrictive laws on women's human rights.

He does not stop at abortion. Grover says states are wrong to prosecute women for illegal drug use or drinking during pregnancy. His point is that criminalisation only succeeds in driving women away from the help they need:

Criminalization of conduct during pregnancy impedes access to health-care goods and services, infringing the right to health of pregnant women. Where women fear criminal prosecution, they may be deterred from accessing health services and care, as well as pregnancy-related information. For example, women may not seek antenatal services if they are faced with the risk of prosecution from transmitting HIV, which poses a risk to their health and the health of the foetus. This undermines public health objectives related to HIV, because women may refuse testing entirely if they face criminal penalties for transmission.

And states that do not allow women access to contraception - including the morning-after pill - are also breaching their rights.

Criminal laws and other legal restrictions that reduce or deny access to family planning goods and services, or certain modern contraceptive methods, such as emergency contraception, constitute a violation of the right to health.

This is not the rant of an NGO or a single-issue campaigner. Grover's report is an official UN document. What will be interesting now is to see how many states feel they have to change their policies as a result of it.